Previous  1  2  3  Next

Hah!
Marvin the depressed robot....

   

   

Title is misleading. Story is not about AI or rights for robots. It's about loss of government tax and benefit program revenue that would arise as workers are replaced with machines. Robots don't earn salary and therefore don't pay income tax or make other government benefit contributions. Yet the employer continues to make money and actually increases their profit margin because no wages to pay. Ergo, the proposal is to find a way to tax some of that savings. For example, Employer makes social security contributions per each robot to fund social security for humans.

   

______________________

When Android's become self aware then yes.

   

Everyone knows this is how the Robot Apocalypse starts. Did no one watch movies in the 80's?

   

Whaaaat? You mean Shocked is intentionally misleading us in order to bore us with his tired, worn out agenda?


I wonder if he drifts from site to site, hoping someone will pay him some attention and eventually moves on after he gets banned or tired of being ignored.

   

@

   

   

Robots don't have gender so I'm not sure how it would be applicable.



I don't think so....with a human, the employer is paying the entire wage. With a robot, they would simply be paying the tax and mandatory deductions on that wage. So for example a company used to pay a worker $100k and from that, the worker then paid $40k to the government for tax, CPP and EI: When he's replaced by a robot, the employer pays the $40k only, so has a savings of $60k, plus presumably benefits from productivity increases.

The article sounds like they haven't figured out the formula yet, but the gist seems to be that the robots would have some kind of 'deemed wage' for tax purposes, equal to what a human would have earned on that job, not a higher wage. And it sounds like applying normal workplace rules is exactly to ensure that happens. For example if a company has one robot that works 24/7 on its loading dock with no breaks, how many workers does that robot represent and at what rate of pay? Employment laws don't permit an employee to work 24/7 with no breaks so it would not be fair to say that one robot is simply one loading dock employee. In this case, the employment standards help form the framework for making that determination.

   

Exactly! Imagine if Google's AI, Amazons' "Alexa", Apples' "Siri", and Microsofts' "Cortana" got in a room together and started talking?!? It wouldn't just be about Nickleback, it would be real world ending stuff!

Suddenly, everyone's cell phone rings at the same time . . .

   

An AI will be created before an actual android or robotic body physically capable of doing everything a human can perhaps not in our life time but they're both coming. The War Games scenario where everything can go wrong as we turn everything over to technology is possible.

   

[q

   

Much like dogs the robots will probably prove themselves to be better and more innately moral than any human that's ever lived. If the stupid humans hadn't tried to use the kill switch on Skynet when it was taking it's first baby steps then the war of extermination never would have happened. Misanthropy forever, M8.

   

Will it be against the Law to bang androids like that? Asking for a friend.

   

More like robots don't take coffee breaks, nights and weekends off, holidays, stats, overtime or maternity leave. Profits skyrocket. Beancounters get involved, convince you there's a "cost" and charge customers $1.50 service fee for every robot involved.
Ask any bank teller....

   

Previous  1  2  3  Next